The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

P was employed as a driver of a medicar, used to transport patients to and from hospitals and nursing homes, for A.C.S. Medicar for approximately 3 1/2 months. P was involved in four accidents with the employer's vehicle. Each of these accidents occurred while P was backing up and striking a stationary object with the vehicle. There were no patients in the medicar at the time of these accidents and none of the accidents caused severe damage. P was suspended from work for three days after the first accident, paid the employer for the damage to the medicar after the second accident, and was again suspended after the third accident. After the fourth accident, P was discharged because his involvement in the accidents violated a company rule. P's application for unemployment insurance benefits was denied by a claim adjudicator. P appealed and an administrative hearing was conducted. A.C.S. felt that there was no choice but to terminate P because he had some type of problem when he was backing up the medicar. P was a member of a union while working for A.C.S. and a union rule provided for discharge after two accidents. When asked by the hearing referee whether the employee is allowed leeway for accidents that are not his fault, A.C.S. answered affirmatively and indicated that was why P was discharged after four accidents. The referee issued a decision denying benefits, finding P ineligible because his actions constituted misconduct within the meaning of the Act. P appealed to D. D affirmed the denial under section 602A of the Act. P filed a complaint in the circuit court for administrative review of the Board's determination. The circuit court reversed. D appealed.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.